WPA 2.0: Whoever Rules the Sewers Rules the City CompetitionSponsor: The Architect’s Newspaper, UCLA School of Arts and Architecture, Ziman Center for Real Estate Development Type: 2-stage Language: English Registration fee:
$40 – per student or independent team
$100 – professional team Eligibility: Designers of all fields are eligible to submit for this competition, which is staged in two phases. Multi-disciplinary teams are particularly encouraged. Awards:
$5,000 to as many as six professional competition finalists to continue to develop their proposals. Timetable:
24 July, 2009 – registration deadline
7 August, 2009 – proposals are due
21 August, 2009 – finalists announced
10 November, 2009 – phase 2 submittals due Jury:
Stan Allen – Principal, Stan Allen Architect; Dean, school of Architecture, Princeton University
Cecil Balmond – Deputy Chairman, Ove Arup and Partners
Elizabeth Diller – Principal, Diller Scofidio + Renfro
Walter Hood – Principal, Hood Design Urban Landscape + Site Architecture
Thom Mayne – Founder and Director of design, Morphosis
Marilyn Jordan Taylor – Consulting Partner, SOM; Dean, PennDesign, University of Pennsylvania Design Challenge:
WPA 2.0 encourages projects that explore the value of infrastructure not only as an engineering endeavor, but as a robust design opportunity to strengthen communities and revitalize cities. There is no requirement that proposals be located in the United States. Nevertheless, it will be important for designers to demonstrate the applicability of proposals located outside the United States to the United States context.
Beyond the mere replacement of obsolete or overtaxed infrastructure, WPA 2.0 seeks design ideas that exploit the opportunity for such solutions to be leveraged, through nested scales of thinking, into strategies that catalyze a larger and more visible public benefit. In this respect, it is looking for proposals that put architecture back to work through designs that:
– are embedded with added value (multifunctionality, imageability, public presence),
– represent potential prototypes, adaptable for use in numerous locations,
– are locally self-regulated and controlled (i.e. which “unlock” the grid),
– strategically attract investment and/or generate community stability, and
– generate new sustainability practices. Submission Requirements:
Proposals shall consist of a digital design sketchbook that outlines and illustrates:
– core premise and objectives (the problem addressed and its solutions),
– inventiveness,
– design approach, developed at a conceptual level, and
– opportunities for implementation (qualities that are tangible and concrete, such as why or how it might be financed)
The sketchbook should include both visual and textual information, with pages formatted vertically 8.5” by 11”: either in single sides or as double-page spreads. Its length must not exceed 10 sides. The digital file, in PDF format @ 300 dpi, should not exceed 10 MB. For more information, go to: http://wpa2.aud.ucla.edu/info/ |
Perkins & Will
Carrying the label, “Artistic Ideas Competition,” five firms vied for a commission to design a new National Museum of the U.S. Navy. Household names, the five were
Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) Copenhagen/ New York
Gehry Partners (Los Angeles)
DLR Group (Columbus, OH)
Perkins&Will (Chicago) Winner!
Quinn Evans (Ann Arbor) With a site not yet identified, it is possible that a final design will look quite different from the present submission. the Navy has expressed a preference for M Street SE and 6th Street SE, near the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C. Young Architects in Competitions When Competitions and a New Generation of Ideas Elevate Architectural Quality 
by Jean-Pierre Chupin and G. Stanley Collyer
published by Potential Architecture Books, Montreal, Canada 2020
271 illustrations in color and black & white
Available in PDF and eBook formats
ISBN 9781988962047
What do the Vietnam Memorial, the St. Louis Arch, and the Sydney Opera House have in common? These world renowned landmarks were all designed by architects under the age of 40, and in each case they were selected through open competitions. At their best, design competitions can provide a singular opportunity for young and unknown architects to make their mark on the built environment and launch productive, fruitful careers. But what happens when design competitions are engineered to favor the established and experienced practitioners from the very outset? This comprehensive new book written by Jean-Pierre Chupin (Canadian Competitions Catalogue) and Stanley Collyer (COMPETITIONS) highlights for the crucial role competitions have played in fostering the careers of young architects, and makes an argument against the trend of invited competitions and RFQs. The authors take an in-depth look at past competitions won by young architects and planners, and survey the state of competitions through the world on a region by region basis. The end result is a compelling argument for an inclusive approach to conducting international design competitions. Download Young Architects in Competitions for free at the following link: https://crc.umontreal.ca/en/publications-libre-acces/ Six Firms Competed to Rethink the Future of a Major Museum 
Aerial view of winning design ©Nieto Sobejano Arquitectos (courtesy Malcolm Reading Consultants)
The history of the Dallas Museum of Art’s expansion has been punctuated by several moves, culminating in a new building designed by Edward Larrabee Barnes in 1984. The importance of this move to a new, somewhat desolate location in the city cannot be underestimated: it has led to the revitalization of what is now called the “Arts District,” with the relocation of various arts institutions to new facilities: the opera house (Foster and Partners), Dee and Charles Wyly Performing Arts Theater (REX/OMA), Nasher Sculpture Center (Renzo Piano), and I.M. Pei’s Meyerson Symphony Center being among the most significant. Read more… 
Courtesy Malcolm Reading Consultants, ©Kengo Kuma & Associates
A UNESCO World Heritage Site Again on the World Stage How does one approach a challenge when creating a design worthy of a park with a history dating back to antiquity? This was what four design teams faced when shortlisted for the design of a Visitor Center for the Butrint National Park in Albania. The park’s history is illuminating in this regard.
Read more…
Chungji National Heritage Museum Competition
Image ©Ona Architects + Jongjin Lee architects + Laguillo Arquitectos
For those unfamiliar with Korean Heritage and its symbols, the choice of the jury for a new complex to house artifacts, now located at various scattered sites, would seem to beg more information, especially when one views the designs of the non-selected finalists—all quite modern. Some of this can certainly be explained by the subject matter of the new museum’s holdings, another by the site in broader terms. Some might say that emphasis placed on the heritage element in the design brief fostered an interpretation leading to the choice of the winning design: “The site chosen for the new Chungji National Museum is logical: Chungju, located in the central part of the Korean Peninsula, is the center of the so-called ‘Jungwon culture,’ which has played an important role geographically and historically since ancient time. Jungwon culture developed around the Namhan River, which runs through the central region from east to west, and the relics showing this are currently scattered and stored in various museums.”
Read more… University of Florida’s College of Design Construction and Planning’s New Addition 
Development phase image courtesy ©Brooks + Scarpa
If architects have had one complaint concerning the planning and realization of a project, it has been with planners and especially construction managers, both of whom often display a lack of knowledge about architecture. The survival of a well-conceived design can hang in the balance when there is a knowledge gap at the planning and realization end.
Read more…
|
